changing external forces that require adaption for survival and growth. Educational institutions, although not necessarily affected by globalizing forces, are not exempt from these challenges. Colleges, for example, must constantly change and adapt, as the members seek to implement new organizational initiatives that meet the needs of a changing student body and a changing external environment. As most organizations, colleges possess a top-down bureaucratic structure where leaders play an integral role in the functioning and maintenance of all activities, and are recognized as the driving force behind school reforms. However, it is those at the forefront, the educators, who are given the task of successfully implementing the change, and yet are largely dismissed during reform developmental phases. The study described in this document explored dental hygiene educators’ perspectives of how they may build personal capacity during an externally mandated national curriculum reform. This chapter provides a summary of the study and a discussion of key lessons that emerged from the exploration of participants’
narratives used to develop a grounded theory of how educators may build personal capacity. The chapter includes implications for theory, educator training and practice, educator identity, and further research.
Summary of the Study
This study was conducted to investigate how dental hygiene educators build personal capacity as they implement and evaluate a new curriculum mandate. Given that personal capacity entails the knowledge, values, assumptions, and beliefs of members of a learning community (Mitchell & Sackney, 2006, 2011), the indicators for building
personal capacity used to develop the conceptual framework for this study were (a) building knowledge, (b) building practice, and (c) building self-awareness. To conduct this qualitative study, a semi-structured interview guide was developed consisting of open-ended questions based on the conceptual framework and used during the interview process. Participants chosen through a purposeful sampling method shared professional narratives that were explored for common themes to identify participants’ perceptions of what they needed to build personal capacity.
The findings of this study were organized under the themes of participants’ (a) perceptions of structural influence, (b) perceptions of learning access, and (c) perceptions of identity. With respect to the first theme, participants’ narratives identified the top-down bureaucratic structure of dental hygiene colleges where administrators were the driving force behind the reform in participants’ individual colleges. Despite their having no choice in implementing the National Competencies mandate, participants recognized the necessity of the curriculum reform and its benefits to dental hygiene education, and, therefore, did not express resistance to the required change. Concerning the second theme, participants described the need for more collaborative initiatives, with improvement in communication within and outside of colleges to build professional knowledge among educators. Under the third theme, participants described the need to build a common identity and vision for the profession and shared the perceived
requirement of more communication among educators nationally in order to achieve these. Despite this study’s focus on dental hygiene educators, its findings may be applied to educators of other educational organizations or members of noneducation
organizations in future research and studies.
Discussion
This study identified the effect of structural influences on the relationships of members of the organization. Most colleges function as bureaucratic organizations where leaders are the drive behind school reform, while the educators are expected to
successfully implement the mandated change. Narratives identified educators’
perceptions of isolation within and outside of their colleges, especially those of part-time status. Participants described receiving information regarding the reform from their college administrators and given limited to no information regarding the curriculum mandate from outside sources, especially to those educators in private colleges. This segregation of members of dental hygiene colleges exemplifies the barriers to developing a learning community. Mitchell and Sackney (2011) identify the necessity of structural support within an organization for achieving an inclusive learning environment for all members: “A learning community is supported when organizational structures, power dynamics, and procedural frameworks support professional learning for individuals and for groups” (p. 17). This study revealed that the isolation of educators within and between their schools resulted in educators being unclear of the expected reform outcomes. Hargreaves and Fullan (2012) warn of the predicament of isolation as it not only shakes teachers’ confidence but also prevents collaborative initiatives among educators:
Uncertainty, isolation, and individualism are a toxic cocktail….When teachers are afraid to share their ideas and successes for fear of being perceived as blowing their own horns, when they are reluctant to tell others about a new idea on the grounds that others might steal it or take credit for it, when they are afraid to ask
for help because they might be viewed as incompetent, and when they use the same approach year after year even though it is not working— all of these
tendencies shore up the walls of individualism and isolation. They institutionalize conservatism. (pp. 107-108)
Evidently, isolation among educators deters knowledge sharing and collaboration and leads to poor outcomes of school reforms.
Narratives that described educators’ independence were limited to the individual educator’s classroom. Whether a private or community college educator, all participants concurred that they were given no choice with the bureaucratically mandated reform.
Therefore, all participants’ autonomy was nonexistent in the National Competencies mandate. Evans (2001) warns that this kind of approach leads to a devaluing of educators and their practices:
Efforts to improve schools' accountability via statewide competency testing and curriculum mandates also dismay teachers, because they diminish their autonomy and deprofessionalize their work. Some critics of schools are convinced that such trimming of teachers' freedom is precisely what is needed, that external pressure is required to improve and direct their performance. But to the extent that these efforts make teachers more like assembly line workers, they are likely to generate resistance—active or passive—not enthusiasm. (Chapter 5, section 3, para. 6) Therefore, educator autonomy is essential to achieving educators’ compliance with the mandated school reform.
The literature identified instructor resistance as a common reaction to a top-down reform mandate. However, findings of this study contradicted the literature as the data
did not reveal participants’ perceptions of resistance to the National Competencies.
Rather, there was a consensus among participants that the reform had to be done and educators were expected to do it. This expectation may have provided a positive perspective to the mandated reform, as participants recognized their colleges were
dependent on the educators being at the forefront of this change. Educator success would ultimately lead to the success of the program, and, in some cases, prevent the closure of their college. Participants also unanimously acknowledged the necessity of the reform in achieving higher standards in dental hygiene education. As the participants recognized the value of the National Competencies, they did not resist this document. Evans (2001) asserts that people accept change if is meaningful and further notes that: “People must discover their own meaning in such changes before they can accept them” (Chapter 2, Section 2, para. 10). Therefore, the lack of resistance expressed by participants was a result of some characteristics of the National Competencies reform that the participants found to be positive and meaningful.
Despite the overall acceptance of the reform itself, negative perspectives of the reform process did emerge from the data, most particularly pertaining to competition among educators. Participants identified the need for more networking and collaboration with colleagues not only among other colleges in Ontario, but also on a national level.
However, there were identified deterrents for collaborative initiatives during the reform due to competition among private dental hygiene colleges. The data revealed that failure to successfully implement the National Competencies by the mandated deadline would result in closure of private colleges, which further enhanced educators’ reluctance to
share knowledge. The competition described by participants reflects Hargreaves and Fullan’s (2012) conceptualization of competition:
We certainly have seen many bad forms of win-lose competition that include self-centeredness, widespread cheating, divisive effects of performance-based pay, envy and jealousy, unwillingness to offer assistance to struggling neighbors, and, like a spoiled child, finding yourself all alone with no one to share all your expensive toys (books, interactive whiteboards, sporting facilities, or highly skilled teachers) when you keep all your goodies for yourself. (pp. 142-143) Though participants from the community colleges did not describe the lurking threat of college closure, their narratives still revealed frustrations with the disconnection and competition among fellow faculty. These participants, most particularly part-time faculty, described the challenges of not knowing what is being taught in their own colleges.
Despite a desire to create a more open and collaborative approach to
implementing the reform, participants recognized the college leader as being responsible for driving the mandate and establishing how the mandate would be implemented in their college. Evans (2001) suggests school reform most often entails a top-down mandate where leaders use coercive measures to drive educators to implement a desired outcome:
The methodology for innovation is almost entirely top-down in nature, a
combination of dissemination and pressure. There may be much lip service paid to ‘participation,’ but this usually means getting people to ‘go along,’ to have a
‘sense of ownership.’ The implementation goal is to have staff adopt the expert plan as is. This requires explanation, persuasion, training, and incentives; if these
fail to produce the proper results, it requires mandates, requirements, and policies.
(Chapter 1, Section 2, para. 4)
This type of mandate contravenes educators’ personal capacity building as it does not permit educators to take part in creating the innovation. As Mitchell and Sackney (2011) assert: “Extending personal capacity requires the educator to move from reflection and analysis (deconstruction) into action (reconstruction). This sort of movement positions educators as active creators of knowledge, not simply as passive consumers of knowledge that has been created elsewhere” (pp. 35-36). Hargreaves and Fullan (2012) also
challenge the authenticity of change when teachers’ power is limited by leaders:
“Authentic professional collaboration is doubtful when it is based on external agendas that administrators decide, at times of their choosing, and in relation to purposes in which teachers have no control, such as test score thresholds” (p. 125). Evidently, the few leader-driven collaborative initiatives were limiting with respect to dental hygiene educators. An example provided by participants included the online dental hygiene collaborate website open to administrators of private colleges to post curriculums during the reform. This not only caused a barrier with private colleges but also failed in creating collaboration among educators.
Participants expressed that they had little to no knowledge of what was being taught in other classes within their own college due to deficient communication between educators. Mitchell and Sackney (2006) assert the school leader, the principal in their study, is responsible for creating open communication within their learning community.
In traditional schools, teachers are typically concerned with their own work and pay scant attention to what happens in other classrooms. By contrast, in a
learning community, the collaborative environment and the centering role of the principal raise awareness levels about current practices, new possibilities, and ongoing challenges throughout the school. (p. 633)
However, participants did not identify college leaders or administrators as responsible for opening lines of communication among educators as information was often not
disseminated by leaders and administrators. Rather, participants suggested that dental hygiene educators must themselves take responsibility for opening communication. This requires the breaking of traditional bureaucratic structures for educators to take on a role traditionally identified as being accomplished by college leaders. As Tichy and Cohen (1998) state: “Though the specific forms may be different, the underlying premise is the same: Bureaucracy stifles people's ability and desire to lead” (p. 29). Therefore, a flattening in organizational structure of dental hygiene education might help to establish communication within their learning community.
Accessing knowledge was described as a challenge by all participants. Some improvement in this was noted after the reform and closure of colleges that did not meet expected standards. However, the data revealed a consensus that obtaining information was challenging, especially outside of their college. Furthermore, participants suggested not all dental hygiene educators have equal knowledge of the National Competencies and the expected outcomes of the reform. Despite the National Competencies being an initiative to standardize dental hygiene education, educators’ dismissal from
developmental stages of the reform and lack of collaborative initiatives were identified by participants as creating knowledge gaps among educators. Participants described the need to know what was happening in other colleges within Ontario and other provinces.
This supports Senge’s (1990) assertion that “team learning” is essential for organizational learning. Not only is accessing knowledge important from a team learning perspective, but it also leads to commitment in school reform.
School reform requires educators to experience loss in giving up old ways to implement the mandated change. As Cohen and Tedesco (2009) contend:
Competing values come to the surface, conflict emerges, loss becomes real, and individuals have to change what they are doing and how they are thinking.
Clearly, making progress on identified adaptive issues lies at odds with our culture of individualism in dental schools and in higher education in
general….Because of resistance to loss, creating an environment in which others begin to engage becomes essential. (p. 8)
Despite Cohen and Tedesco’s assertion that loss during reform leads to resistance, improvement in educators’ knowledge access can provide what instructors need to create a solution to their loss. As Evans (2001) states, “Although change usually represents loss, from such loss comes not only despair but also innovation. Indeed, despair is often the root of innovation” (Chapter 4, Section 2, para. 3). Therefore, knowledge overcomes loss and creates change.
This study revealed that the participants’ perceptions of identity included
professional identity, vision, valuing, educational background, and quality of graduates.
Tichy (1983) describes these elements as a cultural system that makes up the values and norms of the members of the organization. The literature concurs that cultural changes are needed for organizational reform. Hargreaves and Fullan (2012), for example,
explain that the “right drivers” of the reform must tackle a change in culture to achieve a successful system:
A big difference between successful systems and unsuccessful ones is that the former have a clear sense of direction and a high degree of coherence, and an interconnected set of policies and strategies as well as an embedded culture of improvement that provides that direction and coherence. They have what we called the right drivers for change. The wrong drivers change the surface, whereas the right drivers change the culture, as we explained in our example of inserting individualistic teacher appraisal schemes into negative school or system cultures. (p. 175)
However, the literature credits the school leaders as being responsible for building cultural change within their school. As Mitchell and Sackney (2006) contend:
The direct involvement of the school principal is central to the successful development of a culture and a set of systems that sustain a community of
learners…. The principals' involvement, we have discovered, unfolds through the performance of four functions: center, holder of the vision, builder, and role model. (p.631)
Leaders are also recognized for changing culture based on who is permitted into the organization. From a business organization perspective, Tichy (1983) reflects on the potential to change the culture by changing the hiring criteria:
The modification of culture will be largely dependent on how the human resource management systems are used to shape and mold the changes. New hiring criteria will be needed to culturally screen people as they enter organizations;
development programs will need revamping as will appraisal systems which reflect the desired culture of an organization. (p. 46)
This theory was reflected in this study as participants identified the challenges of colleagues who are deficient in knowledge and need to improve their professional competence. This may also be extended to participants’ perceptions of the diminished standards of students entering the programs and graduating. Narratives indicated that students entered the program from high school with a lack of foundational knowledge, and suggested that dental hygiene colleges should be more selective with applicants.
However, this poses a challenge for private colleges that need to generate income from student enrollment, and with fewer student applicants due to the flooded dental hygiene job market, there are fewer applicants to select. Therefore, Tichy’s suggestion for culturally screening people entering the organization does not take into consideration the limitations in selection or supply and demand of applicants.
Research participants recognized the importance of cultural influence on their profession, including the need to build a shared vision, identity, and value for dental hygiene educators. Senge (1990) recognized the value of developing a shared vision:
“When there is a genuine vision (as opposed to the all-too-familiar ‘vision statement’), people excel and learn, not because they are told to, but because they want to” (p. 9). The data generally described the task of building vision as being accomplished by dental hygiene practitioners. Tichy (1983) asserts the process of open systems planning where key people in the organization come together to develop a core mission that may be used to solve the organization’s current and possible future challenges. The narratives of this study focused on the needs of the educators themselves, who may be regarded as the key
people. However, with the current bureaucracy of dental hygiene education, structural barriers were identified as deterrents of the communication and collaboration required for building cultural practices, including vision.
Perceptions of identity were an area where participants described feelings of uncertainty. Narratives described frustration with the public opinion of the dental hygienist as a cleaning lady. Participants agreed that there is a need for clarification regarding dental hygienists’ identity. This need was not limited to the identity of dental hygiene educators but to all dental hygiene practitioners. One of the goals for publication of the National Competencies document in addition to other evidence-based documents published by the national dental hygiene association was to establish a professional identity (Lawlor, 2013). However, participants of this study continued to voice their uncertainty surrounding their identity after the publication of the National Competencies document. Narratives did not credit the National Competencies in contributing to any advancement or credibility of dental hygienists’ identity. Furthermore, participants suggested that discussions and conversations as educators and as a profession generally need to take place in order to establish the professional identity. Standardizing dental hygiene education at the degree level on a national basis was also suggested for the future identity of dental hygiene.
Implications of the Study
Research participants were from private and community dental hygiene colleges, and of diverse teaching and subject assignments. Despite the diversity among
participants, common themes emerged from their narratives that identified what they felt was needed to build personal capacity during the National Competencies curriculum
reform. The common themes suggest some implications for theory, educator training and practice, educator identity, and future research.
Implications for Theory
The conceptual framework developed to investigate how the National
Competencies curriculum reform impacted dental hygiene educators’ personal capacity
Competencies curriculum reform impacted dental hygiene educators’ personal capacity